Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : V.NEELADRI RAO
J.Sadanandam - Appellant
Versus
Election Tribunal (Subordinate Judge, Sangareddy) - Respondent
Decided On : 06-12-91
GRAM PANCHAYATS ACT - DISQUALIFICATION OF EMPLOYEES OF INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKINGS - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 17 - SCOPE OF MARGINAL NOTES - DEBATES IN LEGISLATURE - CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS - DISCRIMINATION - LEGISLATION BY INCORPORATION AND LEGISLATION BY REFERENCE.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, elected as President of Mandal Praja Parishad (M.P.P.) and Sarpanches of various Gram Panchayats, challenged the election petitions filed against them on the ground that they were disqualified from contesting the elections being employees of public sector undertakings. The election of the petitioner in W.P. No. 11868/89 was set aside by the Election Tribunal on the ground that he was disqualified as an employee of B.H.E.L., a public sector undertaking. The other petitioners, who were employees of Singareni Collieries, a public sector undertaking, filed writ petitions challenging the election petitions on the ground that they were not disqualified from contesting the elections.
Finding of the Court:
1. The word "employee" in Section 17 of the A.P. Gram Panchayats Act, as amended by Act 32/86, includes "workman". 2. The marginal note of a section cannot control the plain words of the statute. 3. Debates in the Legislature or Parliament cannot be looked into for the purpose of construing statutory provisions, unless there is any doubt in the interpretation of the words in the Section. 4. Section 17 of the A.P. Gram Panchayats Act does not offend Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. 5. Section 10(g) of the A.P. Mandala Praja Parishads, Zilla Parishads and Zilla Pranalika Abhivrudhi Mandalas Act, 1986 (Act 31 of 1986) is a case of legislation by reference and not legislation by incorporation.
Issues: 1. Whether the word "employee" in Section 17 of the A.P. Gram Panchayats Act, as amended by Act 32/86, includes "workman". 2. Whether the marginal note of a section can control the plain words of the statute. 3. Whether debates in the Legislature or Parliament can be looked into for the purpose of construing statutory provisions. 4. Whether Section 17 of the A.P. Gram Panchayats Act offends Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. 5. Whether Section 10(g) of the A.P. Mandala Praja Parishads, Zilla Parishads and Zilla Pranalika Abhivrudhi Mandalas Act, 1986 (Act 31 of 1986) is a case of legislation by incorporation or legislation by reference.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The word "employee" in Section 17 of the A.P. Gram Panchayats Act, as amended by Act 32/86, includes "workman" because the expression "employee" is wide enough to include all persons working under an employer for wages or salary, whatever might be the category in which he is working. 2. The marginal note of a section cannot control the plain words of the statute, as it is not part of the statute. 3. Debates in the Legislature or Parliament cannot be looked into for the purpose of construing statutory provisions, unless there is any doubt in the interpretation of the words in the Section. 4. Section 17 of the A.P. Gram Panchayats Act does not offend Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, as the classification made in the Act is reasonable and there is a nexus between the object and the classification. 5. Section 10(g) of the A.P. Mandala Praja Parishads, Zilla Parishads and Zilla Pranalika Abhivrudhi Mandalas Act, 1986 (Act 31 of 1986) is a case of legislation by reference and not legislation by incorporation, as the Legislature intended to include all the subsequent amendments also made from time to time in the provision that was referred to in the later statute.
Final Decision: All the writ petitions were dismissed.
( 1 ) AS similar points are involved, all these writ petitions are heard together. The petitioner in W. P. No. 11868/89 was elected as the President of Mandal Praja Parishad (for short M. P. P.), Sangareddy, while the other petitioners were elected as Sarpanches of various Gram Panchayats. Election petitions were filed challenging the elections of these petitioners. While the petitioner in W. P. No. 11868/89 is a workman in B. H. E. L. , the petitioners in the other writ petitions are workmen in Singareni Collieries. The election of the petitioner in W. P. No. 11868/89 was challenged inter alia on the ground that he was disqualified, being an employee of B. H. E. L. , a public sector undertaking, for being elected as the President of M. P. P. The Election Tribunal set aside the election of the above petitioner by accepting the contention of the election petitioner that his nomination was wrongly accepted as he was disqualified from contesting to the post of president of M. P. P. The election of the other petitioners was challenged on the sole ground that they are the employees of Singareni Collieries, a public sector undertaking, and hence, they are disqualified from contesting for the post of sarpanch. Those petitioners filed the writ petitions praying for quashing the election petitions by alleging that they are not disqualified for the post of sarpanch eventhough they are working in Singareni Collieries, a public sector undertaking. The petitioner in W. P. No. 11868/89 filed the writ petition challenging the judgment and order of the election tribunal setting aside his election.
( 2 ) BEFORE adverting to the contentions of the petitioners and respondents, it is convenient to refer to the relevant provisions of the A. P. Gram panchayats Act, 1964 and A. P. Mandala Praja Parishads, Zilla Praja parishads and Zilla Pranalika, Abhivrudhi Mandate Act 1986 (for short act of 1986 ):
( 3 ) THE relevant portion of Section 17 of the A. P. Gram Panchayats act after it was amended by Act 32/86 is as under: "sec. 17. Disqualification of officers and servants of State or central Government or of local authorities or employees or workmen of industrial undertakings: no village servant and no other officer or servant of the State or Central Government or of a local authority or an employee of any Co-operative Society registered under the Andhra Pradesh co-operative Societies Act 1964 or an employee of any Corporation or any industrial undertaking owned or controlled by the State or central Government shall be qualified for being chosen as or for being a member of a Gram Panchayat. (Emphasis supplied ). Explanation: - x x x (i) x x x (ii) x x x
( 4 ) THE relevant portions of sub-sections (1) and (6) of Sec. 12 of the a. P. Gram Panchayats Act reads as under:"sec. 12. Election and term of office of Sarpanch: (1) There shall be a Sarpanch for every Gram Panchayat, who shall be elected in the prescribed manner by the persons whose names appear in the electoral roll for the Gram Panchayat, from among themselves. A person shall not be qualified to stand for election as Sarpanch, unless he is not less than twenty-one years of age. x x x x x x x x (1-A) x x x x (2) x x x x (3) x x x x (4) x x x x (5) x x x x (6) The provisions of Sections 17 to 22 shall apply in relation to the office of the Sarpanch as they apply in relation to the office of an elected member of the gram panchayat:"x x x x
( 5 ) THE relevant portion of Section 10 of Act of 1986 reads as under:"section 10. Disqualification for becoming a member: Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person shall be disqualified to become a member of the Mandala Praja Parishad, if such person, on the date fixed for scrutiny of nominations for e ection under sub-section (1) of Section 4 or on the date of becoming a member as the case may be (a) x x x x (b) x x x x (c) x x x x (d) x x x x (e) x x x x (f) X X X X (g) is disqualified to become or continue as a member of a member of a
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
